Bloodletting at ESPN

[WrongVerb]

A bunch of on-air talent -- including our beloved leatherpants -- has been laid off by ESPN today (http://deadspin.com/a-running-list-of-espn-layoffs-1794664091):


With phone calls and meetings beginning informing some ESPN employees that they have been laid off, word will slowly trickle out all day long about who they are. There will be plenty of names you have heard of, as ESPN reorients their daily lineup of shows, and their online video and stories to match.


Jim Bowden @JimBowdenMLB

I feel blessed & privileged to have worked @ESPN and most importantly work w/ so many great people.Thank you. I look forward to what's next
8:39 AM - 26 Apr 2017

[Reds Fanatic]

Here is an updated list of who has been let go so far

http://awfulannouncing.com/espn/confirmed-espn-layoffs-constantly-updated.html

[Boston Red]

Overdue. ESPN is bloated and terrible (other than when they're showing actual sporting events).

[Caveat Emperor]

ESPN's business model of subscriber-based revenue, tied to basic cable packages, is dying. These are just the death throes, and the fallout that comes next is really going to send major ripples through the sports world.

They're hemorrhaging subscribers and they've got tons of really bad contracts for content that aren't going to bring in nearly enough eyeballs going forward.

[WrongVerb]

ESPN's business model of subscriber-based revenue, tied to basic cable packages, is dying. These are just the death throes, and the fallout that comes next is really going to send major ripples through the sports world.

They're hemorrhaging subscribers and they've got tons of really bad contracts for content that aren't going to bring in nearly enough eyeballs going forward.

Divorcing themselves from cable and going to a streaming model would work wonders for their bottom line.

[WVRed]

Divorcing themselves from cable and going to a streaming model would work wonders for their bottom line.

In some ways they have, but streaming hasn't gotten the kinks worked out of it. In time though it will be the way to go.

I'm starting to wonder more who's left at ESPN than who isn't.

[Stray]

Looks like they fired the entire hockey staff, all 2 of them.

[Stray]

Cordcutting is obviously driving this entire thing, but the fact that ESPN, outside of live sports, has become unwatchable helped speed up this collapse.

[WVRed]

Looks like they fired the entire hockey staff, all 2 of them.

Barry Melrose survived.

[Stray]

Oh right, forgot about him lol

[Slyder]

Barry Melrose survived.

When will we see Barry Melrose and Mel Kiper's hair in the same room together!

[Caveat Emperor]

Divorcing themselves from cable and going to a streaming model would work wonders for their bottom line.

Not really. ESPN's business model is dependent on non-sports viewers subsidizing the cost for sports viewers. You pay less because your grandmother (who only watches Fox News and the Weather Channel) pays for ESPN too as part of her basic cable package.

If ESPN went strictly to a streaming model, they'd get slaughtered because costs would need to go up on subscribers to pay for all the lost revenue from the multitudes of grandmas and other non-sports viewers who might watch ESPN if they had it, but won't pay extra for the content -- and that's to say nothing about the lost revenue from decreased ad rates due to lost eyeballs. ESPN already charges everyone ~$8.50 as part of your cable for ESPN -- so you can only imagine how much ESPN would have to charge to maintain revenue from JUST people subscribing to ESPN.

There's no way out for ESPN that doesn't involve massive cash losses for the Mouse Empire, at this point.

[Joseph]

I think fewer shows about off season NFL workouts might be a good place to start. Talk more about the games and less about the off field stuff. Probably not enough 'names' people recognize on this list either. There are some sure, but get rid of some of the fluffy types and keep more of the journalist types.

[BuckeyeRed27]

Not really. ESPN's business model is dependent on non-sports viewers subsidizing the cost for sports viewers. You pay less because your grandmother (who only watches Fox News and the Weather Channel) pays for ESPN too as part of her basic cable package.

If ESPN went strictly to a streaming model, they'd get slaughtered because costs would need to go up on subscribers to pay for all the lost revenue from the multitudes of grandmas and other non-sports viewers who might watch ESPN if they had it, but won't pay extra for the content -- and that's to say nothing about the lost revenue from decreased ad rates due to lost eyeballs. ESPN already charges everyone ~$8.50 as part of your cable for ESPN -- so you can only imagine how much ESPN would have to charge to maintain revenue from JUST people subscribing to ESPN.

There's no way out for ESPN that doesn't involve massive cash losses for the Mouse Empire, at this point.

But that's the point, that can't be their business model any longer. They are going to have to offer a pay streaming package. It doesn't have to be just that, they can still have their cable offering, but their has to be a way for cord cutters to buy just ESPN. I think they've stayed away from it to avoid conflict in their negotiations with the cable companies, but that time is over.

[Caveat Emperor]

But that's the point, that can't be their business model any longer. They are going to have to offer a pay streaming package. It doesn't have to be just that, they can still have their cable offering, but their has to be a way for cord cutters to buy just ESPN. I think they've stayed away from it to avoid conflict in their negotiations with the cable companies, but that time is over.

The point is that there is absolutely no sustainable business model for ESPN. Every decision they've made over the last decade has been with the idea of doing everything possible to make themselves indispensable for cable providers and then continuously raising their subscriber fees as a result (on the theory that "cable without ESPN won't sell). They're locked into some truly hideous rights deals right now -- with the NFL and the NBA especially. They can't go to a hybrid stream/cable solution because of their carriage agreements with cable providers, they can't go streaming only because there simply isn't enough revenue out there to offset their bad business deals.

They're in a death spiral; the only thing saving them is that they're a subsidiary of a parent company that prints money with other ventures.

[Chip R]

I think fewer shows about off season NFL workouts might be a good place to start. Talk more about the games and less about the off field stuff. Probably not enough 'names' people recognize on this list either. There are some sure, but get rid of some of the fluffy types and keep more of the journalist types.

People seem to eat that kind of stuff up. Same with mock drafts and spring games. It probably doesn't cost a lot to produce and there are people who are really into that stuff. I think the off the field stuff is interesting to a lot of people. It's similar to the gossip columns about celebrities. If so and so is arrested or tests positive for PEDs or drugs or blows his fingers off with a firecracker, that may effect people's daily fantasy team(s) and the games they bet on. We say we don't care about that stuff but we really do. I'm not sure being journalists really pays off for them. You could say 30 for 30 is journalism but it's more nostalgia than anything. I think social media may have had some effect on their bottom line. Why hire someone to cover the Dallas Cowboys and get the inside scoop when it will probably be on Twitter where you can get it for free?

[Boston Red]

If so and so is arrested or tests positive for PEDs or drugs or blows his fingers off with a firecracker, that may effect people's daily fantasy team(s) and the games they bet on.

Sure, that's actual news that directly effects the play o the court. That stuff I do want, partially for the reasons listed. What I, personally, am not as interested in is the Phil/Melo drama, what Jon Lester thinks about Thames and juicing, the political stances of particular athletes, etc.

[Caveat Emperor]

People seem to eat that kind of stuff up. Same with mock drafts and spring games. It probably doesn't cost a lot to produce and there are people who are really into that stuff. I think the off the field stuff is interesting to a lot of people. It's similar to the gossip columns about celebrities. If so and so is arrested or tests positive for PEDs or drugs or blows his fingers off with a firecracker, that may effect people's daily fantasy team(s) and the games they bet on. We say we don't care about that stuff but we really do. I'm not sure being journalists really pays off for them. You could say 30 for 30 is journalism but it's more nostalgia than anything. I think social media may have had some effect on their bottom line. Why hire someone to cover the Dallas Cowboys and get the inside scoop when it will probably be on Twitter where you can get it for free?

Exactly. ESPN has had a difficult time with the idea that you can get sports news / highlights seconds after they happen on your phone -- you don't need to wait until the 11PM SportsCenter for highlights.

For a long while, their solution was the infamous "Embrace Debate" -- where you got all your shows like PTI, Around the Horn, First Take, etc. from. Now they've moved away from that a little bit, but still don't know what they want to be.

[MWM]

Cord cutting is obviously a big issue going from 100M subscribers in 2011 to about 87M now. But the fee they charge per sub has gone up over 60% since then as well. Their ad revenue has continued to increase as well and is expected to continue increasing. Even bigger is them overpaying for broadcast rights to so many sports/events. I did some work late last year looking at all sports TV rights contracts signed over the past 15+ years and then compared that to how much viewership they got for each contract. ESPN pays significantly more per viewership than any of the other cable network, and cable networks pay way more than broadcast networks.

ESPN's revenue is growing, but their margins are dropping significantly. That's why they're cutting. They have to get much leaner if they want to continue to be able to pay what it takes to retain broadcast rights. Losing those rights would damage their business much more than cord cutters. Their NFL deal runs through 2021 and it's likely the next deal(s) will begin to be negotiated next year. I suspect they're cutting as much cost as they can in preparation for that negotiation. They don't want to lose the NFL, but they have to be able to be profitable. They had gotten too fat anyway.

[Stray]

They seem to be sticking with the politics/pop culture theme and their debate shows. It won't be long before ESPN is to sports what MTV is to music.

[Caveat Emperor]

They seem to be sticking with the politics/pop culture theme and their debate shows. It won't be long before ESPN is to sports what MTV is to music.

Amusingly enough, I think the future for ESPN probably looks a lot like what the WWE is currently doing with their "network."

[Reds Freak]

Not really. ESPN's business model is dependent on non-sports viewers subsidizing the cost for sports viewers. You pay less because your grandmother (who only watches Fox News and the Weather Channel) pays for ESPN too as part of her basic cable package.

If ESPN went strictly to a streaming model, they'd get slaughtered because costs would need to go up on subscribers to pay for all the lost revenue from the multitudes of grandmas and other non-sports viewers who might watch ESPN if they had it, but won't pay extra for the content -- and that's to say nothing about the lost revenue from decreased ad rates due to lost eyeballs. ESPN already charges everyone ~$8.50 as part of your cable for ESPN -- so you can only imagine how much ESPN would have to charge to maintain revenue from JUST people subscribing to ESPN.

There's no way out for ESPN that doesn't involve massive cash losses for the Mouse Empire, at this point.

I think I've read the next highest channel to ESPN's $8 subscriber fee is either TNT or TBS at a little over $1.

[MWM]

ESPN is current just under $8 (although all 4ESPNs combined is closer to $9.50), TNT is next at slightly over $2. Fox News and the NFL Network are around the $1.50 mark. ESPN was under $3.50 ten years ago, which means it's gone up over 8% per year. That wasn't sustainable, but I bet they thought it was.

[Chip R]

ESPN is current just under $8 (although all 4ESPNs combined is closer to $9.50), TNT is next at slightly over $2. Fox News and the NFL Network are around the $1.50 mark. ESPN was under $3.50 ten years ago, which means it's gone up over 8% per year. That wasn't sustainable, but I bet they thought it was.

One wonders what will happen if they do cut the price by a buck or two. It may make this layoff seem tame in comparison.

[Caveat Emperor]

ESPN is current just under $8 (although all 4ESPNs combined is closer to $9.50), TNT is next at slightly over $2. Fox News and the NFL Network are around the $1.50 mark. ESPN was under $3.50 ten years ago, which means it's gone up over 8% per year. That wasn't sustainable, but I bet they thought it was.

For a long time I was convinced that internet providers (most of whom are also cable providers) would fight back against streaming video by imposing bandwidth caps and/or charging more money for faster access -- to the point where it would just make more sense to subscribe to a cable package as well.

There's just so little competition in the space (I have a whopping two choices when it comes to high speed internet service) that I just assumed prices would remain high.

[cumberlandreds]

I saw that Andy Katz was let go. He was really good. I never knew him to be wrong on anything he reported.

[BuckeyeRed27]

Disney is one of the investors in Hulu and I have wondered how long it will be until they offer some type of ESPN package there. Netflix has all but said they aren't going to do live sports and Hulu can't compete on content or original programming, seems like this will happen sooner or later.

[Chip R]

Disney is one of the investors in Hulu and I have wondered how long it will be until they offer some type of ESPN package there. Netflix has all but said they aren't going to do live sports and Hulu can't compete on content or original programming, seems like this will happen sooner or later.

Amazon Prime is going to do (some) Thursday night NFL games this season so Netflix may get in the game.

[BuckeyeRed27]

Amazon Prime is going to do (some) Thursday night NFL games this season so Netflix may get in the game.

https://www.emarketer.com/Article/Live-Sports-on-Netflix-Nope/1015691

They said on their Q1 earnings call about 2 weeks ago that they weren't going to do that. Now that may change, but not in their plans right now.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/02/business/media/hulu-adds-espn-abc-and-fox-news-to-streaming-service.html?_r=0

Hulu did announce a "skinny" bundle streaming service that includes ESPN last year, but unless I've missed it I don't think it has launched or had any other details come out.

[Chip R]

https://www.emarketer.com/Article/Live-Sports-on-Netflix-Nope/1015691

They said on their Q1 earnings call about 2 weeks ago that they weren't going to do that. Now that may change, but not in their plans right now.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/02/business/media/hulu-adds-espn-abc-and-fox-news-to-streaming-service.html?_r=0

Hulu did announce a "skinny" bundle streaming service that includes ESPN last year, but unless I've missed it I don't think it has launched or had any other details come out.

Well, I was talking in the future. If Amazon is doing it and Hulu is doing it, they may eventually get into the act. If ESPN is still doing poorly, maybe they buy the rights for the Monday night games off them.

[Caveat Emperor]

Amazon Prime is going to do (some) Thursday night NFL games this season so Netflix may get in the game.

After watching what has happened with ESPN, why on Earth would you jump into this rat race?

[Chip R]

After watching what has happened with ESPN, why on Earth would you jump into this rat race?

They have to see if it's going to make financial sense. Twitter did it last year but you can't watch Twitter on your TV. Amazon is a rival for programming. I'm a cordcutter and the Dolphins are my team. If they are on Thursday night football, my choices are to go to a bar and watch or stay at home and watch on my TV with Amazon Prime. That means I'm not watching Netflix. Maybe they don't jump into the NFL with both feet. Maybe they try it out with a NCAA game of the week or something. If there aren't any problems, maybe they talk to the NFL and see if they can work something out. Netflix has a goodly amount of money they can throw at the NFL to show one game a week.

[M2]

For a long time I was convinced that internet providers (most of whom are also cable providers) would fight back against streaming video by imposing bandwidth caps and/or charging more money for faster access -- to the point where it would just make more sense to subscribe to a cable package as well.

There's just so little competition in the space (I have a whopping two choices when it comes to high speed internet service) that I just assumed prices would remain high.

They're trying to get rid of net neutrality again so they can do exactly that. If they get their way, they'll be throttling capacity and putting up toll booths all over the place.

[Caveat Emperor]

They have to see if it's going to make financial sense. Twitter did it last year but you can't watch Twitter on your TV. Amazon is a rival for programming. I'm a cordcutter and the Dolphins are my team. If they are on Thursday night football, my choices are to go to a bar and watch or stay at home and watch on my TV with Amazon Prime. That means I'm not watching Netflix. Maybe they don't jump into the NFL with both feet. Maybe they try it out with a NCAA game of the week or something. If there aren't any problems, maybe they talk to the NFL and see if they can work something out. Netflix has a goodly amount of money they can throw at the NFL to show one game a week.

Netflix doesn't need it -- they're putting their money (correctly, IMO) into new original content to replace all the old content that's being pulled off due to studios and networks realizing that these old shows can be monetized on their own streaming services in the future. They've got 50 million users already at a solid price point -- if they bid on the NFL, how many more people are realistically going to add Netflix to watch games? That's the calculus they've gotta do, and if they can't make up the cost of the bid in new subscribers, it means they'll have to either cut back on adding programming elsewhere (a catastrophic mistake) or raise prices (also a mistake).

Amazon? Maybe -- but again, do they really need the NFL to push their prime services? Also, you have to remember that one of the driving forces behind networks bidding up the NFL content packages was to use the games as a platform to push other things -- it's why you're stuck with endless live reads about the new episode of "2 Broke Girls" or "Prison Break." Networks are OK writing off some portion of the NFL as a "loss" because they believe they can make it up on the back end by pushing viewers to other places on the TV network. When the games are on a subscription service like Amazon, what else are they pushing? The games don't add value to the service the way they do to the "Big Four" networks.

[WrongVerb]

Netflix doesn't need it -- they're putting their money (correctly, IMO) into new original content to replace all the old content that's being pulled off due to studios and networks realizing that these old shows can be monetized on their own streaming services in the future. They've got 50 million users already at a solid price point -- if they bid on the NFL, how many more people are realistically going to add Netflix to watch games? That's the calculus they've gotta do, and if they can't make up the cost of the bid in new subscribers, it means they'll have to either cut back on adding programming elsewhere (a catastrophic mistake) or raise prices (also a mistake).

Amazon? Maybe -- but again, do they really need the NFL to push their prime services? Also, you have to remember that one of the driving forces behind networks bidding up the NFL content packages was to use the games as a platform to push other things -- it's why you're stuck with endless live reads about the new episode of "2 Broke Girls" or "Prison Break." Networks are OK writing off some portion of the NFL as a "loss" because they believe they can make it up on the back end by pushing viewers to other places on the TV network. When the games are on a subscription service like Amazon, what else are they pushing? The games don't add value to the service the way they do to the "Big Four" networks.

Didn't you just kind of answer your own question about Neflix in your second paragraph? If Netflix sees adding football games as a loss-leader to push people to other programming (and then can justify a rate increase (btw, I'd pay $30-$40/mo for full access to Netflix's entire library)) that would make reasonable sense for them to do it.

[Caveat Emperor]

Didn't you just kind of answer your own question about Neflix in your second paragraph? If Netflix sees adding football games as a loss-leader to push people to other programming (and then can justify a rate increase (btw, I'd pay $30-$40/mo for full access to Netflix's entire library)) that would make reasonable sense for them to do it.

Not really.

If you're watching the NFL on Netflix, you're already subscribing to Netflix -- they've got you as a customer. The Networks rely on ratings to drive advertising revenue -- if they have 15 million people watching an NFL game, they want to push part of that audience to other shows to increase ratings and increase ad rates for those shows. If live-reads for a show during an NFL game drives viewers to a show who otherwise wouldn't watch or the audience from an NFL game stays around to watch the next piece of network programming, those extra eyeballs translate to more advertising money for the network. That's why the networks jam as many commercials and live-reads for their own products into games.

Netflix doesn't have advertising and they don't rely on ratings for revenue; they don't care if you watch Orange is the New Black or the MST3K reboot -- they just care that they have enough content to keep you paying $10-$15 per month for your account. So the "audience push" value for Netflix is precisely nil, unless they radically change their business model away from flat-rate pricing (which would be a huge mistake, IMO).

[M2]

Though Netflix could make make advertising revenue off of live sports. I believe the WWE Network is now making some real money off of advertising.

[Stray]

Social media has kinda upended things. Everyone with a smartphone is a journo, every journo is a normal person. Not a secret that journos lean way too the left, but a social media feed just kinda magnified it to everyone. Of course they're real people who are entitled to their own opinions on whatever, but for the sake of these outlets I think everyone would be better off with professional and personal accounts. If Random Joe follows college basketball writer Seth Davis, they're doing so for college basketball news. When Seth Davis spends the better part of a year pushing an agenda to try and get his favorite candidate elected, people lose trust not only in him, but the profession. Journalism is a disaster right now because social media opened up a window into the personal opinions of people we're supposed to trust as objective messengers.

ESPN chose a side and injected polarizing topics into an entertainment outlet. That's gonna lose every time.

I don't care how reporters and pundits feel about politics, I just wish everyone would get back to sports. I liked when it was a getaway, now I avoid everything that isn't live sports. It sucks.

[Chip R]

John Clayton has gotten the ax.

[Joseph]

Hope his mom can keep him in the basement a while longer.

[cumberlandreds]

John Clayton has gotten the ax.

Do they have any actual reporters left?

[bucksfan2]

John Clayton has gotten the ax.

I like Clayton, I think he always gave some good insight. But when you break it down, does it make sense to keep a guy on like Clayton and his seniority, especially when he is based in Seattle? At the end of the day, its ESPN, don't you think they can get someone in there 20 years younger who can do just as good of a job?

ESPN had operated for years under the impression that SC was bigger than any anchor/personality, but they continued to keep some of the old soldiers around has ceased to be useful. Not that Clayton ceased to be useful, but its always nice to get a fresh perspective in there.

[Boston Red]

I like Clayton, I think he always gave some good insight. But when you break it down, does it make sense to keep a guy on like Clayton and his seniority, especially when he is based in Seattle? At the end of the day, its ESPN, don't you think they can get someone in there 20 years younger who can do just as good of a job?

ESPN had operated for years under the impression that SC was bigger than any anchor/personality, but they continued to keep some of the old soldiers around has ceased to be useful. Not that Clayton ceased to be useful, but its always nice to get a fresh perspective in there.

It would be funny if someone in ESPN management wrote a memo to this effect prior to the firings and some of the elder statesmen got a sweet age discrimination lawsuit to boost their severance pay.

[Assembly Hall]

ESPN had operated for years under the impression that SC was bigger than any anchor/personality, but they continued to keep some of the old soldiers around has ceased to be useful. Not that Clayton ceased to be useful, but its always nice to get a fresh perspective in there.

I will agree with part of that. Guys like Berman, Vitale, and Kiper's "schtick" wore off along time ago. But I liked Katz and Clayton. In the end, I really don't watch ESPN that much. If I do it is for a game or I catch "Mike and Mike"(which has went to hell in a hand basket as well). If I want MLB talk, I watch the MLB network. Same goes for the NFL network. Somewhere down the line ESPN just lost what they had.

[Chip R]

This isn't bloodletting but life imitating art.

http://espnmediazone.com/us/press-releases/2017/08/espn-transforms-espnu-espn8-ocho-august-8/?sf103527323=1

[Assembly Hall]

This isn't bloodletting but life imitating art.

http://espnmediazone.com/us/press-releases/2017/08/espn-transforms-espnu-espn8-ocho-august-8/?sf103527323=1

Gonna have to mark that down on my calendar.........................NOT!!!!!!!

[bucksfan2]

Gonna have to mark that down on my calendar.........................NOT!!!!!!!

I think this is awesome. I probably won't watch because I have too much going on, but think its a cool thing to do.

[Assembly Hall]

I think this is awesome. I probably won't watch because I have too much going on, but think its a cool thing to do.

Do you remember when ESPN first came on the air?

[bucksfan2]

Do you remember when ESPN first came on the air?

Nope, I wasn't old enough.

[Assembly Hall]

Nope, I wasn't old enough.

Well I figured that, but I was. They had nothing to offer unless you liked PKA full contact karate. Their only draw was SportsCenter.

[M2]

Well I figured that, but I was. They had nothing to offer unless you liked PKA full contact karate. Their only draw was SportsCenter.

Ahem, CFL football during the glory days of Dieter Brock, Warren Moon and Condredge Holloway

[Assembly Hall]

Ahem, CFL football during the glory days of Dieter Brock, Warren Moon and Condredge Holloway

Great viewing!!!!!!!!! LOL

[Chip R]

Do you remember when ESPN first came on the air?

Our old buddy George Grande was the first host of Sportscenter.

[M2]

Great viewing!!!!!!!!! LOL

Amazing viewing. The losing team would score 50+.

[Reds Fanatic]

Ahem, CFL football during the glory days of Dieter Brock, Warren Moon and Condredge Holloway

I also remember a lot of Australian rules football during the early days of ESPN.

[Chip R]

Not to mention pro wrestling. AWA, IIRC.

[Assembly Hall]

Awwwww, the good ole days!!!!!!!

[Hoosier Red]

Our old buddy George Grande was the first host of Sportscenter.

We know his story

[Slyder]

Do you remember when ESPN first came on the air?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=99z_d-iRnsg

I know this isn't from when ESPN first started but I still love this one.

FOLLOW ME! FOLLOW ME TO FREEDOM!

[Joseph]

I remember a lot of worlds strongest man competitions with guys named Fleming flipping tires the size of my house.

[paintmered]

The obscure sports of The Ocho are more watchable than their manufacturing drama spewing talking heads that fills the time between the NFL and NBA.

[dougdirt]

The obscure sports of The Ocho are more watchable than their manufacturing drama spewing talking heads that fills the time between the NFL and NBA.

I'm guessing that the ratings will say otherwise.

For as much garbage that people talk on those kinds of shows, they somehow get very good ratings.

[Joseph]

I'm guessing that the ratings will say otherwise.

For as much garbage that people talk on those kinds of shows, they somehow get very good ratings.

Wonder how much of it is mindless watching in bars and barbershops because...sports?

[paintmered]

Wonder how much of it is mindless watching in bars and barbershops because...sports?

... with no closed captioning and on mute. I might as well watch a mime tell me their opinions and hot takes. Wait, that could actually be better.

[Hoosier Red]

I'm guessing that the ratings will say otherwise.

For as much garbage that people talk on those kinds of shows, they somehow get very good ratings.
It depends.
Anecdotally speaking, Richard Deistch(Media writer for SI?) loves trolling Skip Bayless' twitter feed with notes on how pitiful Bayless' show ratings are.

The real advantage to shows like this is they cost almost nothing to produce. Hell, half of them are streamed on multiple platforms, so they're able to get two big buckets of content filled.
Unfortunately, this leads to self absorbed gasbags getting way more money.

[BuckeyeRed27]

Wonder how much of it is mindless watching in bars and barbershops because...sports?

Unless they've changed how ratings are determined, things like that actually don't count.

[Chip R]

https://www.forbes.com/sites/maurybrown/2017/08/08/disney-accelerates-purchase-of-bamtech-espn-disney-will-see-new-digital-streaming-media-apps/

[bucksfan2]

It depends.
Anecdotally speaking, Richard Deistch(Media writer for SI?) loves trolling Skip Bayless' twitter feed with notes on how pitiful Bayless' show ratings are.

The real advantage to shows like this is they cost almost nothing to produce. Hell, half of them are streamed on multiple platforms, so they're able to get two big buckets of content filled.
Unfortunately, this leads to self absorbed gasbags getting way more money.

When Bayless was on First Take it was a wildly successful show. You knew what the station was, and if it was bumped off ESPN to 2 or U, people knew where that was.

Bayless was a controversial figure who went from the biggest sports channel to FS1 where people had to search where to find it. It may be on a FS1 website, but I can honestly say I have never visited that site.

Bayless, Cowherd, Whitlock went for the money to Fox, but the rest of the complementary pieces still reside with ESPN. I listen to Herd from time to time, and his big analysis are ESPN rejects Chris Brussard and Rob Parker. He has pushed forward more controversial topics and takes in order to gain notoriety. Its sad at times. Herd was there and absolutely quiet when Ball was attacking his "co-host" telling her she needed to stay in her lane.

[Chip R]

ESPN has officially gone round the bend.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/23/business/media/robert-lee-university-virginia-charlottesville.html?mcubz=0

[BillDoran]

ESPN has officially gone round the bend.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/23/business/media/robert-lee-university-virginia-charlottesville.html?mcubz=0

12771

I suppose you can never be too cautious, but on the surface that seems to be an odd decision.

[Assembly Hall]

ESPN has officially gone round the bend.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/23/business/media/robert-lee-university-virginia-charlottesville.html?mcubz=0

OMG! Really? That is unbelievable.

[Slyder]

ESPN has officially gone round the bend.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/23/business/media/robert-lee-university-virginia-charlottesville.html?mcubz=0


Heard they gave him the option to work another game and honestly there's 3432546 games I'd rather do than willingly watch anything ACC related (exception being Clemson).

[Sea Ray]

Anybody notice that former ESPN and Baseball Tonight guy, Gary Miller has joined the local news team at Channel 12? I caught him on the 11pm news recently. Interesting that he landed here. It would appear that this is quite a pay cut from ESPN and Los Angeles. We'll see how long he stays

[Assembly Hall]

Anybody notice that former ESPN and Baseball Tonight guy, Gary Miller has joined the local news team at Channel 12? I caught him on the 11pm news recently. Interesting that he landed here. It would appear that this is quite a pay cut from ESPN and Los Angeles. We'll see how long he stays

Hopefully he doesn't piss on any Cincinnati policemen!

[Sea Ray]

Hopefully he doesn't piss on any Cincinnati policemen!

I didn't hear about that. Did he have "an issue"?

[Assembly Hall]

I didn't hear about that. Did he have "an issue"?

http://articles.latimes.com/1997/oct/12/sports/sp-42169

[Sea Ray]

http://articles.latimes.com/1997/oct/12/sports/sp-42169

OK, that goes way back. Didn't know about that

[Assembly Hall]

OK, that goes way back. Didn't know about that

I remember it well.

[WVRed]

Didn't really know where to put this, but the broadcast from the Chargers Broncos game was just awful.

And that's not even talking about the sideline reporter.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BuckeyeRed27]

Didn't really know where to put this, but the broadcast from the Chargers Broncos game was just awful.

And that's not even talking about the sideline reporter.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I thought Mowins did a pretty good job. She wasn't amazing, but I wouldn't mind her doing more games.

Rex was ok. I think he has potential in that role, but was certainly scattered last night.

I just kind of feel bad for the sideline guy. He was clearly very nervous.

[bucksfan2]

I thought Mowins did a pretty good job. She wasn't amazing, but I wouldn't mind her doing more games.

Rex was ok. I think he has potential in that role, but was certainly scattered last night.

I just kind of feel bad for the sideline guy. He was clearly very nervous.

Was Mowins the announcer who use to do B1G games with Speilman a few years ago? If it was, and I think it was, I was never really a big fan of hers. I guess I am glad ESPN gave her a shot to do NFL games, but I just don't care for her voice. To be honest, I never watch a game because of an announcer, but if I turn on a game and someone I don't like is doing it I just kinda let out a big sigh.

Now if Ian Darke is calling a game I will watch that game over other comparable games.

[Reds Fanatic]

Was Mowins the announcer who use to do B1G games with Speilman a few years ago? If it was, and I think it was, I was never really a big fan of hers. I guess I am glad ESPN gave her a shot to do NFL games, but I just don't care for her voice. To be honest, I never watch a game because of an announcer, but if I turn on a game and someone I don't like is doing it I just kinda let out a big sigh.

Now if Ian Darke is calling a game I will watch that game over other comparable games.

Yes she still does mainly college football on ESPN usually the noon games but I guess this year she is also going to do some NFL games on CBS on days where they have a lot of games.

[BuckeyeRed27]

Was Mowins the announcer who use to do B1G games with Speilman a few years ago? If it was, and I think it was, I was never really a big fan of hers. I guess I am glad ESPN gave her a shot to do NFL games, but I just don't care for her voice. To be honest, I never watch a game because of an announcer, but if I turn on a game and someone I don't like is doing it I just kinda let out a big sigh.

Now if Ian Darke is calling a game I will watch that game over other comparable games.

I don't think she has ever teamed up with Speilman, unless it was a really long time ago. He was almost always with Sean McDonough. She was with Joey Galloway for a few years and yes she usually gets stuck doing an awful Noon EST Big 10 game. You are probably thinking of Pam Ward, who is not a very good announcer.

[Hoosier Red]

Was Mowins the announcer who use to do B1G games with Speilman a few years ago? If it was, and I think it was, I was never really a big fan of hers. I guess I am glad ESPN gave her a shot to do NFL games, but I just don't care for her voice. To be honest, I never watch a game because of an announcer, but if I turn on a game and someone I don't like is doing it I just kinda let out a big sigh.

Now if Ian Darke is calling a game I will watch that game over other comparable games.

I think that was Pam Ward.

[Sea Ray]

I'm fine with Beth Mowins doing the noon college games between directional schools but it's sad when a network sees fit to have her do MNF. But that's where we are with ESPN.

[BuckeyeRed27]

I'm fine with Beth Mowins doing the noon college games between directional schools but it's sad when a network sees fit to have her do MNF. But that's where we are with ESPN.

We've had Chris Berman doing that game for the past 5 years. Not having to listen to him have indigestion on air for 3 hours was a win by itself. The fact that Beth Mowins did a fine job was even better.

[Caveat Emperor]

Was Mowins the announcer who use to do B1G games with Speilman a few years ago? If it was, and I think it was, I was never really a big fan of hers. I guess I am glad ESPN gave her a shot to do NFL games, but I just don't care for her voice. To be honest, I never watch a game because of an announcer, but if I turn on a game and someone I don't like is doing it I just kinda let out a big sigh.

I find Beth Mowins to be thoroughly average as an announcer -- she's fine for ESPN3 or some "who cares" mid-table P5 college matchup, but she'd be pretty far down the list of people I'd want on a major national broadcast. I recognize that's an unacceptable Take to drop in 2017, though.

The reality, though, is that the color commentator for most telecasts is what ends up ruining the experience. ESPN is stuffed to the gills with ex-jocks who offer only milquetoast criticism of players and slavishly stick to whatever the "pregame storyline" is for whatever they're calling.

[bucksfan2]

I find Beth Mowins to be thoroughly average as an announcer -- she's fine for ESPN3 or some "who cares" mid-table P5 college matchup, but she'd be pretty far down the list of people I'd want on a major national broadcast. I recognize that's an unacceptable Take to drop in 2017, though.

The reality, though, is that the color commentator for most telecasts is what ends up ruining the experience. ESPN is stuffed to the gills with ex-jocks who offer only milquetoast criticism of players and slavishly stick to whatever the "pregame storyline" is for whatever they're calling.

I forgot Berman did that game in the past. I amend what I said above, if he is doing a game, I don't listen unless it is my team playing. I can't stand to listen to him do anything anymore.

I don't know if this is harsh, but I think in order to be successful Mowins needs to be above average. I figure ABC/ESPN did this for a reason, and had a legit excuse that most of their announcers were either on the college game this past weekend and their #1 crew already had a MNF game, but I think it was a publicity stint. On one hand I say good for female announcers of male sports to get the spotlight, but I do wonder if it was a case of giving someone the gig who was just average.

Frankly I think there is a bunch of chaff in the college game once you get past the first few games and I think Mowins can hold her own calling a noon game. I also think ESPN in their latest purge ended up cutting loose a handful of decent announcers pushing forward the blah guys. Frankly if OSU doesn't have the #1 or #2 announcing team you almost realize that the announcing will be less than stellar. But it isn't the reason I am tuning in to watch the game. Heck this year OSU and Michigan will get FOX's #1 college team headlined by THOM.

[Boston Red]

Most of the play-by-play people are forgettable. Honestly, the more forgettable the better, because their job is really to just not get in the way of the game. Mowins is harder to forget because her voice is distinctive from most of the others (obviously). But she's generally not worse than most of the others.

[Hoosier Red]

Most of the play-by-play people are forgettable. Honestly, the more forgettable the better, because their job is really to just not get in the way of the game.

Amen to this. It's what made guys like Gus Johnson so thoroughly overrated to me for so long. There are always exceptions to the rule for guys like Jack Buck and Vin Scully. Baseball in particular has a way of allowing the Play by Play man a little more personality. Especially on radio where he may just be the only voice going for long stretches.

But of the guys who I think excel as play by play guys, there's nothing that necessarily stands out about them other then they were the ones calling some amazing moments.

[Caveat Emperor]

ESPN continues to be an absolute clown show -- they contract out to Barstool Sports to get a TV show (produced by Michael Davies, of "Men in Blazers" fame) from the ultra-popular "Pardon My Take" podcast, agree to allow it to be branded as a Barstool show, and then promptly cancel it a week after debut (https://www.si.com/tech-media/2017/10/23/espn-cancels-barstool-van-talk-pft-commentator-big-cat-pardon-my-take) because their own employees took issue with Barstool brand being associated by ESPN.

This on the heels of their public dust-up with Jemele Hill -- the personality (along with Micheal Smith) they'd pushed as one of the new faces of their brand -- over personal tweets encouraging activism against the NFL.

It's like this company isn't satisfied with the slow death of bleeding subscribers...

[Chip R]

ESPN continues to be an absolute clown show -- they contract out to Barstool Sports to get a TV show (produced by Michael Davies, of "Men in Blazers" fame) from the ultra-popular "Pardon My Take" podcast, agree to allow it to be branded as a Barstool show, and then promptly cancel it a week after debut (https://www.si.com/tech-media/2017/10/23/espn-cancels-barstool-van-talk-pft-commentator-big-cat-pardon-my-take) because their own employees took issue with Barstool brand being associated by ESPN.

This on the heels of their public dust-up with Jemele Hill -- the personality (along with Micheal Smith) they'd pushed as one of the new faces of their brand -- over personal tweets encouraging activism against the NFL.

It's like this company isn't satisfied with the slow death of bleeding subscribers...

It's not that I like ESPN but a lot of time when you listen to Fox Sports Radio it seems that all they do is trash ESPN. Some of it is justified but a lot of the time it seems like it's sour grapes or they are trashing them just because they are their rival. Almost makes me feel sorry for ESPN.

So, I say the over/under on Jemele Hill being fired is 6 weeks.

[Boston Red]

Well, they can't possibly bring back Jamele Hill, but she'll be a weird kind of martyr when they fire her.

[bucksfan2]

ESPN should NEVER have gotten into bed with Barstool Sports. I have visited the website in the past and for a guy its ok, easy reading, although I hardly ever frequent it anymore. But for an organization like ESPN it wasn't a good idea. The guys from "Men and Blazers" have never called themselves "smut peddlers" and really don't have a male chauvinistic attitude. I was shocked to see them partner with Barstool and not that shocked to see the marriage only lasted one episode.

The 6 should have been cancelled shortly after its debut. The 6 PM SC is the mainstay on the network, messing around with that isn't a good idea.

[Caveat Emperor]

ESPN should NEVER have gotten into bed with Barstool Sports. I have visited the website in the past and for a guy its ok, easy reading, although I hardly ever frequent it anymore. But for an organization like ESPN it wasn't a good idea. The guys from "Men and Blazers" have never called themselves "smut peddlers" and really don't have a male chauvinistic attitude. I was shocked to see them partner with Barstool and not that shocked to see the marriage only lasted one episode.

The 6 should have been cancelled shortly after its debut. The 6 PM SC is the mainstay on the network, messing around with that isn't a good idea.

The people ESPN were trying to get out of their deal were Dan Katz (Big Cat) and PFT Commenter -- they're, far and away, the most marketable and successful people to come out of Barstool, and importantly, their content is almost completely devoid of the chauvinism that permeates the rest of Barstool. They're also incredibly well liked by influential ESPN personalities like SVP and Rachel Nichols.

Everyone comes out of this with egg on their face -- ESPN looks like fools for agreeing to put Barstool-branded content on their network while seemingly being ignorant of the type of content they generate, Barstool looks like sellouts for parterning with ESPN only to have it blow up in their face. Even the personality most publicly pushing back against the hire, Samantha Ponder, ended up having old tweets of hers dug up that were a bad look for her.

All completely avoidable.

[Tom Servo]

The people ESPN were trying to get out of their deal were Dan Katz (Big Cat) and PFT Commenter -- they're, far and away, the most marketable and successful people to come out of Barstool, and importantly, their content is almost completely devoid of the chauvinism that permeates the rest of Barstool. They're also incredibly well liked by influential ESPN personalities like SVP and Rachel Nichols.

Everyone comes out of this with egg on their face -- ESPN looks like fools for agreeing to put Barstool-branded content on their network while seemingly being ignorant of the type of content they generate, Barstool looks like sellouts for parterning with ESPN only to have it blow up in their face. Even the personality most publicly pushing back against the hire, Samantha Ponder, ended up having old tweets of hers dug up that were a bad look for her.

All completely avoidable.
I do like PFTCommenter, but I still think Bucksfan is essentially right. There was never much upside in ESPN partnering with Barstool and as you said, it ended with everyone involved looking horrible.

[bucksfan2]

The people ESPN were trying to get out of their deal were Dan Katz (Big Cat) and PFT Commenter -- they're, far and away, the most marketable and successful people to come out of Barstool, and importantly, their content is almost completely devoid of the chauvinism that permeates the rest of Barstool. They're also incredibly well liked by influential ESPN personalities like SVP and Rachel Nichols.

Everyone comes out of this with egg on their face -- ESPN looks like fools for agreeing to put Barstool-branded content on their network while seemingly being ignorant of the type of content they generate, Barstool looks like sellouts for parterning with ESPN only to have it blow up in their face. Even the personality most publicly pushing back against the hire, Samantha Ponder, ended up having old tweets of hers dug up that were a bad look for her.

All completely avoidable.

Your personalities can like them, but you can't partner with them. Honestly it shocked me to hear that they partnering with them. You may be right that Big Cat and PFT Commenter were the two most marketable people, but there is a huge stench that comes along with Barstool. I mean did ESPN not go back and look at Portnoy's history? Were they really that tone def? To me its college humor, it appeals to a certain subset of the population, but once you get a little older, its pretty inappropriate.

[Assembly Hall]

ESPN is basically in the "we are losing money mode". At this point, I expect them to try any and every thing to see what they can do to rectify that.

[Chip R]

Looks like more bloodletting is in the works.

http://awfulannouncing.com/espn/espn-staffers-reportedly-bracing-layoffs-later-year.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

[Assembly Hall]

Looks like more bloodletting is in the works.

http://awfulannouncing.com/espn/espn-staffers-reportedly-bracing-layoffs-later-year.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Wow.

[WVRed]

Looks like more bloodletting is in the works.

http://awfulannouncing.com/espn/espn-staffers-reportedly-bracing-layoffs-later-year.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

As long as Jemele Hill and Michael Smith are two of them.

I don’t care about the political side of it, they are just awful.

[Sea Ray]

As long as Jemele Hill and Michael Smith are two of them.

I don’t care about the political side of it, they are just awful.


ESPN has really lost its way. I must say I was never a Colin Cowherd fan when he was at ESPN but his show on Fox is much better than what he had at ESPN. It makes his ESPN show look like something run out of someone's garage. His show now has class and gets good guests. I also think Shannon Sharpe and Skip Bayless have a much better show that First Take at ESPN. Stephen A. Smith should be another goner.

[bucksfan2]

ESPN has really lost its way. I must say I was never a Colin Cowherd fan when he was at ESPN but his show on Fox is much better than what he had at ESPN. It makes his ESPN show look like something run out of someone's garage. His show now has class and gets good guests. I also think Shannon Sharpe and Skip Bayless have a much better show that First Take at ESPN. Stephen A. Smith should be another goner.

I listen to Cowherd's stuff now on Sirius because he is up against shows I just can't take. Stephen A Smith and Bomani Jones. That said, Cowherd isn't half the guy he was on ESPN. There are only a few analysts on Fox that I think are any good, Schlereth, Danny Kannell, and I don't mind Joel Klatt. But the rest of the people are hot garbage if you ask me. I "think" that ESPN still gets the best analysts, but they falsely believed that you could just replace them.

Frankly, the only show that I listen to or watch on a regular basis is Mike and Mike and they are doing away with that. While ESPN has tried to get more "hip" I they have pushed forward content that really dives into the racial undertones of society. Some of it is unavoidable, but for me, the 18-35 year old demographic that all networks want, it is off-putting. Most of their successful shows have done a good job of navigating that topic while not diving way too deep into it. Anymore you can't turn on the TV or Radio and not hear about Kaep or the Anthem protests. For me it sucks the life out of sports talk radio. I want to hear about the World Series, or the OSU/PSU slate, but most networks are just knee deep in Kaepernick.

[Assembly Hall]

Mike and Mike ends tomorrow after 17 years.

[Sea Ray]

Mike and Mike ends tomorrow after 17 years.

I do listen to them in the mornings but I think it's time. Let's get some new blood in there. Although a Wingo/Golic show isn't exactly new blood

[Chip R]

I do listen to them in the mornings but I think it's time. Let's get some new blood in there. Although a Wingo/Golic show isn't exactly new blood

I only listen to it a few minutes a day when I'm driving into work but it's seemed a little awkward with them and their guests with each telling the guests that they are going to have them on their own show. I know they are still working for the same company but won't they be in the same timeslot and competing against each other?

[Assembly Hall]

https://www.bizjournals.com/boston/news/2017/11/29/espn-eliminates-150-jobs-layoffs-media-bristol.html

[Sea Ray]

https://www.bizjournals.com/boston/news/2017/11/29/espn-eliminates-150-jobs-layoffs-media-bristol.html

No names? If it doesn't involve names we know, who cares?

[WrongVerb]

John Skipper resigns as ESPN president, George Bodenheimer takes over as acting chairman (http://www.espn.com/espn/story/_/id/21804776/john-skipper-resigns-espn-president):


John Skipper resigned as president of ESPN and co-chairman of the Disney Media Networks on Monday.


"Today I have resigned from my duties as President of ESPN," Skipper said in a statement. "I have had a wonderful career at the Walt Disney Company and am grateful for the many opportunities and friendships. I owe a debt to many, but most profoundly Michael Lynton, George Bodenheimer and Bob Iger.

"I have struggled for many years with a substance addiction. I have decided that the most important thing I can do right now is to take care of my problem...."

[Sea Ray]

Another round of layoffs. The following are a few of the folks who are now gone:

Suzy Kolber
Max Kellerman
Keyshawn Johnson
David Pollack
Todd McShay
Steve Young
Matt Hasselbeck

Too bad Stephen A. Smith is still there

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/media/2023/06/30/jeff-van-gundy-jalen-rose-out-espn-layoffs/70372809007/

[Redhook]

Another round of layoffs. The following are a few of the folks who are now gone:

Suzy Kolber
Max Kellerman
Keyshawn Johnson
David Pollack
Todd McShay
Steve Young
Matt Hasselbeck

Too bad Stephen A. Smith is still there

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/media/2023/06/30/jeff-van-gundy-jalen-rose-out-espn-layoffs/70372809007/

Agree about Smith. He’s unwatchable. I like Suzy and Pollack because he was a Bengal, but the rest won’t be missed. Not that anyone still watches ESPN anyways.

[Boston Red]

I have no idea who Pat McAfee is, but everyone seems to blame his contract for all the cost cutting.

[bucksfan2]

I thought Todd McShay was good at his job, but he underwent some personal issues a year or so ago. I wonder if this had any impact on this decision.

The only other shocking one was Suzy Kolber, who had been with the network forever and did a pretty good job.

Kellerman has been bad going back 20 years, no clue how he hung on as long. The rest of the guys are easily replaceable.

FWIW the last show I really listened to (or watched) was Mike and Mike, and since that went off the air years ago, they haven't replaced it with anything good. The only guy in their current lineup that I would watch, is SVP, but he is on after I go to bed so oh well.

The network is unrecognizable from what it once was. That may be market factors, or maybe I am getting old.

Smith keeps a job, he must have a pretty big viewership, but he does nothing for me.

[WVRed]

I have no idea who Pat McAfee is, but everyone seems to blame his contract for all the cost cutting.He was a punter for WVU and the Indianapolis Colts who went on to have a career in wrestling and eventually became a broadcaster for it and football. He put Barstool Sports on the map and honestly I think that is the direction (sports mixed with pop culture) that ESPN is trying to go in.

Sent from my SM-S911U using Tapatalk

[Ky Fried Redleg]

Suzy Kolber was really good from the times I used to watch ESPN. Really knew her stuff. And from what I've heard and read, she is an incredibly nice person.

[redsfanmia]

Suzy Kolber was really good from the times I used to watch ESPN. Really knew her stuff. And from what I've heard and read, she is an incredibly nice person.

I was shocked to find out that Suzy is around 60 years old, I literally thought she was 40ish.

[fearofpopvol1]

I thought Todd McShay was good at his job, but he underwent some personal issues a year or so ago. I wonder if this had any impact on this decision.

The only other shocking one was Suzy Kolber, who had been with the network forever and did a pretty good job.

Kellerman has been bad going back 20 years, no clue how he hung on as long. The rest of the guys are easily replaceable.

FWIW the last show I really listened to (or watched) was Mike and Mike, and since that went off the air years ago, they haven't replaced it with anything good. The only guy in their current lineup that I would watch, is SVP, but he is on after I go to bed so oh well.

The network is unrecognizable from what it once was. That may be market factors, or maybe I am getting old.

Smith keeps a job, he must have a pretty big viewership, but he does nothing for me.

Really surprised they're letting Kolber go. She's such an NFL staple and has been for so long and it's not like she's gotten worse, she's always been good.

McShay is surprising because you would have thought he was the heir apparent to Kiper Jr., who isn't getting any younger. Guess not though. I suppose they also have that newer draft guy from Kansas City (name is escaping me).

Jalen Rose and Jeff Van Gundy are surprising too. Jalen seemed to be rising and Van Gundy had been there forever and while a little cranky did provide good analysis I thought. I'm sure Rose will go somewhere else pretty easily.

[bucksfan2]

Really surprised they're letting Kolber go. She's such an NFL staple and has been for so long and it's not like she's gotten worse, she's always been good.

McShay is surprising because you would have thought he was the heir apparent to Kiper Jr., who isn't getting any younger. Guess not though. I suppose they also have that newer draft guy from Kansas City (name is escaping me).

Jalen Rose and Jeff Van Gundy are surprising too. Jalen seemed to be rising and Van Gundy had been there forever and while a little cranky did provide good analysis I thought. I'm sure Rose will go somewhere else pretty easily.

It shocked me when I saw that Kolber was almost 60. Seems like she hasn't aged in a decade!

McShay isn't Kiper and I think that may be his problem. Matt Miller may be able to slide right in and replace him. I always thought McShay did a fantastic job, especially creating an opposing view to Kiper.

For some reason I was never a fan of Rose. Thought he was on the fast track, but there are a lot of former players who are just replaceable.

Van Gundy is interesting because he was a staple on their NBA coverage, but does anyone really care about the NBA until the playoffs start? That is a pretty big salary to carry when you are really only relevant for a couple of months a season.

[plantmanky]

Kolber and about 6 or 7 others had contracts that were ending in the next few months and had not reach new negations on yet, so those are not that surprising.


Its all about money, cost of contracts vs the $$$$ brought in via advertising. That's why Smith gets to stay.


It does surprise me Greenberg is still there, hes never on any of the shows hes supposed to be the host for anymore. My assumption is he has a buyout thats so large they cant let him go.

[fearofpopvol1]

It shocked me when I saw that Kolber was almost 60. Seems like she hasn't aged in a decade!

McShay isn't Kiper and I think that may be his problem. Matt Miller may be able to slide right in and replace him. I always thought McShay did a fantastic job, especially creating an opposing view to Kiper.

For some reason I was never a fan of Rose. Thought he was on the fast track, but there are a lot of former players who are just replaceable.

Van Gundy is interesting because he was a staple on their NBA coverage, but does anyone really care about the NBA until the playoffs start? That is a pretty big salary to carry when you are really only relevant for a couple of months a season.

McShay is not Kiper for sure. I thought Kiper was older, but I guess he's only 62 so there's probably no urgency. But still, he's been there a while now.

I won't say Rose is my favorite but I still think he's on upswing so he should be fine.

Van Gundy does the prime time games throughout the season too so I wouldn't say it was just playoffs. But he's been a fixture and it seems like a weird time to let him go, but yes. I'm sure nearly everyone on this list was or is getting expensive.

[WVRed]

Kolber and about 6 or 7 others had contracts that were ending in the next few months and had not reach new negations on yet, so those are not that surprising.


Its all about money, cost of contracts vs the $$$$ brought in via advertising. That's why Smith gets to stay.


It does surprise me Greenberg is still there, hes never on any of the shows hes supposed to be the host for anymore. My assumption is he has a buyout thats so large they cant let him go.I think ESPN is changing their format as well. Barstool Sports was taking a chunk of the change which is why they paid what they did to get McAfee.

Heard Joe Buck was a possibility as well. Guess that didn't happen.

Sent from my SM-S911U using Tapatalk

[Bob Sheed]

I would like to see what ESPNs ratings are, minus all the businesses that have them on their TVs with the sound off and no one watching.

[RichRed]

Suzy Kolber is a real pro, so of course ESPN let her go.

The rare times I listened to the morning show, it seemed like Keyshawn never did an ounce of homework. Felt like he was on cruise control all the way to the bank.

[Bob Sheed]

Suzy Kolber is a real pro, so of course ESPN let her go.

The rare times I listened to the morning show, it seemed like Keyshawn never did an ounce of homework. Felt like he was on cruise control all the way to the bank.

She checked enough boxes back in the 2000-teens.

But a combination of time and changing boxes sealed her fate and the fates of many others.

tl;dr Best I can do is Keyshawn.

[bucksfan2]

I think ESPN is changing their format as well. Barstool Sports was taking a chunk of the change which is why they paid what they did to get McAfee.

Heard Joe Buck was a possibility as well. Guess that didn't happen.

Sent from my SM-S911U using Tapatalk

LeBatard had a mini rant about this. Or at least a video I watched of his show. Basically saying that ESPN Radio and the Digital Media properties did nothing to promote and grow their brand.

I don't know if it was when they went simulcast on Mike and Mike, but it appeared they wanted to fill tv hours and didn't really are about radio. They have done little or nothing on the podcast front, and pretty much let radio go to die.

Maybe it was the golden age of radio, but they once had a lineup of Mike and Mike, Kornheiser (replaced by Cowherd) and Dan Patrick. Those were all pretty massive voices in radio, now none of them are on the radio.

I do find it ironic that they payed an astronomic amount for Buck and Aikman, and while I am not Buck fan, I can recognize that he is good. But those two are very replaceable if you ask me. I guess they no longer have that stable of young voices groomed and ready to take over.

[Sea Ray]

Add Gene Wojciechowski to the list:


https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/other/gene-wojciechowski-announces-espn-departure-after-25-years/ar-AA1dpjRh?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=10548fcb78d54e98e0d9acc52a6d77d3&ei=29

[RiverfrontRed]

I hope Disney crashes and burns!!!

[Sea Ray]

I have no problem with them cutting such expensive talent. I am amazed that they pay so much for folks like Keyshawn Johnson or even Suzy Kolber, who is pretty good IMO. Nobody tunes in to hear Suzy Kolber ask a draft pick what it feels like to be drafted. If you're Suzy, wouldn't you accept say $500K rather than $3mill?

[Roy Tucker]

I used to be a frequent viewer of ESPN maybe 10-15 years ago. But they long ago became a cliche of themselves and ceased being a favorite of mine. Once in a while, I’ll watch the 11 pm version to catch all the highlights of baseball games. But that’s about it nowadays.

[UKFlounder]

I saw someone point out that shows likeSportsCenter helped make local sports sections of the newspaper and sports highlights on local news less important.

The internet, streaming, etc, are now doing the same to SportsCenter and other sports shows besides live events.

That may be at least partially why these networks are trying more “debate” type programming and cutting costs, (in addition to cord-cutting.) . They aren’t unique sources of information/highlights any more . Their niche is disappearing.

[westofyou]

I saw someone point out that shows likeSportsCenter helped make local sports sections of the newspaper and sports highlights on local news less important.

The internet, streaming, etc, are now doing the same to SportsCenter and other sports shows besides live events.

That may be at least partially why these networks are trying more “debate” type programming and cutting costs, (in addition to cord-cutting.) . They aren’t unique sources of information/highlights any more . Their niche is disappearing.

It's everywhere now, and the ESPN way of talking over all the games with less than interesting human beings (Booger? Really Booger?) is just as tired.

Never watch the station unless it's an actual contest, and then the sound is down

[cumberlandreds]

It's everywhere now, and the ESPN way of talking over all the games with less than interesting human beings (Booger? Really Booger?) is just as tired.

Never watch the station unless it's an actual contest, and then the sound is down

Same for me. Just for games and occasionally PTI. Too many loudmouths for me who don't know what they are talking about most of the time.

[Roy Tucker]

I’ve always preferred written pieces over video. Writing requires thoughtfulness, narrative, structure, a train of thought, and crafting of a story. Video is just a guy talking off the top of their head. I can get that at my local bar for free. Plus I can ignore them if I want.

[Chip R]

Maybe it was the golden age of radio, but they once had a lineup of Mike and Mike, Kornheiser (replaced by Cowherd) and Dan Patrick. Those were all pretty massive voices in radio, now none of them are on the radio.


I think Patrick is still on.

[Kingspoint]

I like Scott Van Pelt.

[kaldaniels]

As far as bloodletting goes I’m surprised the “announcers broadcasting remotely” never really caught on after COVID settled down.

[Chip R]

As far as bloodletting goes I’m surprised the “announcers broadcasting remotely” never really caught on after COVID settled down.

I think they tried for a while. I think some places are still doing it to cut down on costs and so forth.

[Bob Sheed]

As far as bloodletting goes I’m surprised the “announcers broadcasting remotely” never really caught on after COVID settled down.

Thom's probably not a fan, if he's looking back on it.

[Assembly Hall]

I still listen to Dan Patrick, Colin Cowherd, and Jim Rome. None of them are ESPN affiliated. I like it.

[westofyou]

As far as bloodletting goes I’m surprised the “announcers broadcasting remotely” never really caught on after COVID settled down.

Angels do it

[UKFlounder]

The NBA didn’t want it for their teams

https://awfulannouncing.com/nba/nba-reportedly-requiring-rsns-to-send-broadcasters-to-all-road-games-this-season.html





As far as bloodletting goes I’m surprised the “announcers broadcasting remotely” never really caught on after COVID settled down.

[cumberlandreds]

Angels do it

I noticed Mike Krukow doing it earlier this season. I know he has some health issues too. So the Giants may be allowing for that.

[M2]

Angels do it

I still want these two to be the Angels' broadcast crew.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=taCa8qBgIFY

[westofyou]

I noticed Mike Krukow doing it earlier this season. I know he has some health issues too. So the Giants may be allowing for that.

Yeah, that's a one off for them

[kaldaniels]

I just know if I were the lighting my cigars with $100 dollar bill types, keeping the broadcast crew at home would be the easiest way to make a quick buck. Those rube fans would just have to get over it.

[*BaseClogger*]

I just know if I were the lighting my cigars with $100 dollar bill types, keeping the broadcast crew at home would be the easiest way to make a quick buck. Those rube fans would just have to get over it.

Don't they travel with the team on their chartered flights? If so, there really isn't that much travel expense.

[Assembly Hall]

Don't they travel with the team on their chartered flights? If so, there really isn't that much travel expense.

Ummmm, hotel costs?

[*BaseClogger*]

Ummmm, hotel costs?

Two guys, $300 per night, that's less than $50K per year.

[MWM]

The truth is the majority of these high priced on-air talents don't likely have a positive ROI.

[Boston Red]

Two guys, $300 per night, that's less than $50K per year.

Sure, but they have to eat, too! And Uber from the airport. Now you're talking about taking $0.0000001 off Disney's earnings per share!

[M2]

The truth is the majority of these high priced on-air talents don't likely have a positive ROI.

I think you're probably correct in that they're highly interchangeable in terms of what they do. A lot of people could do PBP and color commentary. What might have ROI is the familiarity of having a consistent and predictable crew do that work. Sunday Night Baseball with Jon Miller and Joe Morgan is a pretty good example of a broadcast that had a certain familiarity to it, or football broadcasts with Pat Summerall and John Madden. Marv Albert was the voice of the NBA for a long time. They're like a comfortable sweater, which is the only way I can explain how anyone allows Joe Buck to continue to national broadcasts. They must figure it would be alienating if someone replaced him, even though it almost certainly would be an upgrade.

[MWM]

I think you're probably correct in that they're highly interchangeable in terms of what they do. A lot of people could do PBP and color commentary. What might have ROI is the familiarity of having a consistent and predictable crew do that work. Sunday Night Baseball with Jon Miller and Joe Morgan is a pretty good example of a broadcast that had a certain familiarity to it, or football broadcasts with Pat Summerall and John Madden. Marv Albert was the voice of the NBA for a long time. They're like a comfortable sweater, which is the only way I can explain how anyone allows Joe Buck to continue to national broadcasts. They must figure it would be alienating if someone replaced him, even though it almost certainly would be an upgrade.

Agree completely on Joe Buck. I just don't get it. But yes, Jon Miller and Joe Morgan were part of the reason I used to watch Sunday Night Baseball for years.

My comment was more directed at those who are in the ancillary coverage or these general sports "take" shows that are on throughout the day. I don't know how much more incremental viewership Keyshawn Johnson was bringing over a replacement level blow hard who could say basically the same unoriginal things.

Speaking for myself only, David Pollack was a deterrent to me watching more College Gameday. When he came on, I generally changed the channel. I'm guessing I wasn't the only one given he was one of the cuts. But I doubt I'd watch much without Kirk Herbstreit. He's as good as it gets in covering a sport outside the actual game, IMO.

I used to watch NFL Sunday Countdown religiously when Tom Jackson was on. He's the other one who as good as anyone I can think of in that kind of role. Then they started getting guys like Mike Ditka and Randy Moss and Rex Ryan and I haven't watched since. I would think guys like that aren't really bringing anyone new but are a big turn off to a lot of people. Those guys probably make way more than they're bringing in.

[M2]

My comment was more directed at those who are in the ancillary coverage or these general sports "take" shows that are on throughout the day. I don't know how much more incremental viewership Keyshawn Johnson was bringing over a replacement level blow hard who could say basically the same unoriginal things.

Oh yeah, they're all the same person.

[Tony Cloninger]

Agree completely on Joe Buck. I just don't get it. But yes, Jon Miller and Joe Morgan were part of the reason I used to watch Sunday Night Baseball for years.

My comment was more directed at those who are in the ancillary coverage or these general sports "take" shows that are on throughout the day. I don't know how much more incremental viewership Keyshawn Johnson was bringing over a replacement level blow hard who could say basically the same unoriginal things.

Speaking for myself only, David Pollack was a deterrent to me watching more College Gameday. When he came on, I generally changed the channel. I'm guessing I wasn't the only one given he was one of the cuts. But I doubt I'd watch much without Kirk Herbstreit. He's as good as it gets in covering a sport outside the actual game, IMO.

I used to watch NFL Sunday Countdown religiously when Tom Jackson was on. He's the other one who as good as anyone I can think of in that kind of role. Then they started getting guys like Mike Ditka and Randy Moss and Rex Ryan and I haven't watched since. I would think guys like that aren't really bringing anyone new but are a big turn off to a lot of people. Those guys probably make way more than they're bringing in.


If they would stick to analytical aspects they are fine. But they all have to be funny. Constantly with the jokes. It seems half the time is joking around with each other and getting their standup routine down. I don’t know who these shows target sometimes.

[M2]

If they would stick to analytical aspects they are fine. But they all have to be funny. Constantly with the jokes. It seems half the time is joking around with each other and getting their standup routine down. I don’t know who these shows target sometimes.

I don't mind the ones who are joking around so much. It's the ones taking it seriously that I can't stand.

[westofyou]

I think you're probably correct in that they're highly interchangeable in terms of what they do. A lot of people could do PBP and color commentary. What might have ROI is the familiarity of having a consistent and predictable crew do that work. Sunday Night Baseball with Jon Miller and Joe Morgan is a pretty good example of a broadcast that had a certain familiarity to it, or football broadcasts with Pat Summerall and John Madden. Marv Albert was the voice of the NBA for a long time. They're like a comfortable sweater, which is the only way I can explain how anyone allows Joe Buck to continue to national broadcasts. They must figure it would be alienating if someone replaced him, even though it almost certainly would be an upgrade.

Exactly, you knew/know you can sit down, watch an event and not be taken down by garbage takes and noise

[Tony Cloninger]

I don't mind the ones who are joking around so much. It's the ones taking it seriously that I can't stand.

Which ones are like that ? It seems they are constantly joking and ribbing each other. It’s worse in Football. Bunch of ex Steelers and Ravens. To annoy me further.

[westofyou]

Which ones are like that ? It seems they are constantly joking and ribbing each other. It’s worse in Football. Bunch of ex Steelers and Ravens. To annoy me further.

I subscribe to the theory that ANYTHING on TV from 9 AM to 6 PM can be missed without FOMO occurring, and that's just east coast time.

It's a bunch of noise, diversions and commercials.

Go outside, listen to a podcast, take a break from talking about football for a day.

This is BIG gripe of mine. A sport with a season that generates ONE contest a week is soooooooooooooooooooooooo interesting that you can discuss it ad nauseum?

Pass

[M2]

Which ones are like that ? It seems they are constantly joking and ribbing each other. It’s worse in Football. Bunch of ex Steelers and Ravens. To annoy me further.

I watch zero football, but there's multiple hot take argument shows. Anything with Skip Bayless or Colin Cowherd is straight from the lowest circle of hell. If Jim Rome is still being put in front of a microphone somewhere, that's just a failure of humanity.

[bucksfan2]

I subscribe to the theory that ANYTHING on TV from 9 AM to 6 PM can be missed without FOMO occurring, and that's just east coast time.

It's a bunch of noise, diversions and commercials.

Go outside, listen to a podcast, take a break from talking about football for a day.

This is BIG gripe of mine. A sport with a season that generates ONE contest a week is soooooooooooooooooooooooo interesting that you can discuss it ad nauseum?

Pass

They need to fill the airtime. Back when I was a kid it was SportsCenter on loop from about 6-noon every day. They struck gold with shows like PTI and Around the Horn as well as the simulcast of Mike and Mike. It almost seemed like they took those shows, and wanted to make that type of show their default coverage. Maybe it was the rise of Skip and Stephen A and the screaming, I must have a take on everything, shows that took ESPN from a sports network to a personality network.

FWIW I find very few athletes listenable and worth their weight. Too many struggle when they are placed in a hosting or every day role. Give me Louis Riddick or Ryan Clark but I could really do without Keyshawn and Randy Moss or Steve Young or Hasselbeck.

[BuckeyeRed27]

Disney announced this morning that espn is likely getting sold.

[westofyou]

They need to fill the airtime. Back when I was a kid it was SportsCenter on loop from about 6-noon every day. They struck gold with shows like PTI and Around the Horn as well as the simulcast of Mike and Mike. It almost seemed like they took those shows, and wanted to make that type of show their default coverage. Maybe it was the rise of Skip and Stephen A and the screaming, I must have a take on everything, shows that took ESPN from a sports network to a personality network.

FWIW I find very few athletes listenable and worth their weight. Too many struggle when they are placed in a hosting or every day role. Give me Louis Riddick or Ryan Clark but I could really do without Keyshawn and Randy Moss or Steve Young or Hasselbeck.

Remember the European road races in the mountains they would show? I'd watch that over Skip and Stephen A every day of the week

[Sea Ray]

Disney announced this morning that espn is likely getting sold.

That would be a good idea. They need fresh set of eyes

[RiverfrontRed]

"Disney is weighing a sale of the company's linear TV business including broadcast network ABC, though it still plans to keep ESPN."

[cumberlandreds]

This really doesn't quite fit her but Dick Vitale has been diagnosed with cancer again. This is the third time in the last couple of years he has had some form of cancer. Its got to be tough on an 84 year old man.


https://www.aol.com/sports/espns-dick-vitale-reveals-vocal-000148671.html

[Boston Red]

You know who used to actually have a pretty great radio show: the Fabulouos Sports Babe. It helped me pass the hours in a boring summer office job during college. As I recall, she spent very little time doing a monologue but mostly had on guests, asked them questions (about sports!) and....listened to their answers. They weren't arguing back and forth or laughing at their own stupid jokes (most biggest radio pet peeve). No idea how long that show lasted or what's become of her, but she was really good in the '90s.

[BuckeyeRed27]

"Disney is weighing a sale of the company's linear TV business including broadcast network ABC, though it still plans to keep ESPN."

Yeah I guess Iger worded it as looking for a “strategic partner”.

[Sea Ray]

This really doesn't quite fit her but Dick Vitale has been diagnosed with cancer again. This is the third time in the last couple of years he has had some form of cancer. Its got to be tough on an 84 year old man.


https://www.aol.com/sports/espns-dick-vitale-reveals-vocal-000148671.html

I'm sure the cancer was there all the time. I doubt he was ever cancer free

[Roy Tucker]

I'm sure the cancer was there all the time. I doubt he was ever cancer free

My oncologist says you need to be without any cancer for 5 years to be considered cancer-free and cured. Up till then, you are in remission.

[Tony Cloninger]

I subscribe to the theory that ANYTHING on TV from 9 AM to 6 PM can be missed without FOMO occurring, and that's just east coast time.

It's a bunch of noise, diversions and commercials.

Go outside, listen to a podcast, take a break from talking about football for a day.

This is BIG gripe of mine. A sport with a season that generates ONE contest a week is soooooooooooooooooooooooo interesting that you can discuss it ad nauseum?

Pass


I agree. It is saturated with non stories or re hashing same story and story. We are in Day 39 of where WR Hopkins and where RB Devin Cook are signing.

I’ve already been told not to sleep on the Steelers about 25 times and how the Ravens are loaded with WR now all because of Mr One Handed Catch that he lives off from his time on the Giants.

The NFL wants to rule the world of sports though so they love this stuff.

[Hillsdale87]

I subscribe to the theory that ANYTHING on TV from 9 AM to 6 PM can be missed without FOMO occurring, and that's just east coast time.

It's a bunch of noise, diversions and commercials.

Go outside, listen to a podcast, take a break from talking about football for a day.

This is BIG gripe of mine. A sport with a season that generates ONE contest a week is soooooooooooooooooooooooo interesting that you can discuss it ad nauseum?

Pass

They're just so behind the times on so many things. They've always focused on the brand over talent, which was maybe fine in the 90s when stars didn't have another outlet, but the internet has changed all of that. Most guys at ESPN are replaceable because ESPN doesn't really do anything unique anymore, and hasn't for years. Now we have unlimited opportunity to listen to whoever we like because distribution is free on podcast platforms, and ESPN has very few personalities that draw eyeballs by themselves. It's probably just Stephen A Smith, SVP, and now McAfee. Nobody can compete with the live rights, but you can easily find better content than most of the studio shows, and you can listen on your phone at the time of your choosing...

They pushed Bill Simmons out, and he was actually thinking years ahead, and they'd be in a better place if they'd listened to him. Every once in a while he'll talk about how much he tried to get ESPN to focus on podcasts, but they were never interested, even when his was growing rapidly. Instead, he went and started The Ringer, which has some of the most popular podcasts and sold to Spotify for $250MM a few years ago, but it's because they're focused on finding unique talent. They have some of the top NBA and NFL guys covering the leagues.

[Bob Sheed]

I'm convinced ESPNs ratings are propped up by commercial establishments that leave that channel on all day, and most of the time don't even have the sound up.

Because any time I am within seeing, or worse... seeing and hearing distance, I'm amazed how comically bad their whole charade is.

[BuckeyeRed27]

I'm convinced ESPNs ratings are propped up by commercial establishments that leave that channel on all day, and most of the time don't even have the sound up.

Because any time I am within seeing, or worse... seeing and hearing distance, I'm amazed how comically bad their whole charade is.

Unless something has changed recently, that type of viewership isn’t counted. Stations like CNBC have historically been very frustrated by that.

[Tony Cloninger]

I watch zero football, but there's multiple hot take argument shows. Anything with Skip Bayless or Colin Cowherd is straight from the lowest circle of hell. If Jim Rome is still being put in front of a microphone somewhere, that's just a failure of humanity.


I used to listen to the mighty 690 when Rome first showed up with his Hot Take. It was new. Fresh. In your face that made you laugh because not too many were this obnoxious. He got too big for the station and after a few years it got old. Jim Everett taking him down after he called him Christie Everett was shocking.
At least he didn’t back off what he said about him to his face. Haven’t listened to him since 1998 or so.

I enjoyed their great baseball coverage with Ted Lightner. Took himself too seriously but was good at baseball news especially the Hot Stove stuff.

[kaldaniels]

ESPN used to be great for scoreboards (Sportscenter), debates, and live sports.

Mobile apps have replaced the first 2.

[*BaseClogger*]

Unless something has changed recently, that type of viewership isn’t counted. Stations like CNBC have historically been very frustrated by that.

Yeah the ratings are number of households and not number of screens, right? So even if they counted a bar with 15 screens showing ESPN it would be one and not 15.

[MWM]

Nielsen piloted an attempt to measure out of home viewing and made promises that they’ve failed to deliver on. They finally bit the bullet and started buying set top box data so they may get there at some point, but no one does it accurately yet.

[Assembly Hall]

I miss "Mike and Mike."

[jimbroznan]

It appears ESPN may no longer be a must carry in Spectrum's cable packages-all 15 million subscribers today are paying $10+ month for it, while only 4 million watching it on a regular basis with another 3 million watching it occasionally . If ESPN became a stand alone like HBO how much would you be willing to pay? ESPN has to get at least $2 billion out of former Spectrum subscribers to break evan. Likely the 8 million who never watch would not be willing to pay even $1. So to make up for that revenue loss, would ESPN have to up charges to $15, would the occasional viewer be prepared to pay that 12 months a year? If not and most of them would only subscribed during college foootball Sept-Jan then would rates have to go to $20? How many would drop then?
Disney/ESPN would also have to increase fees to Hulu/Sling... too.

[Powel Crosley]

It appears ESPN may no longer be a must carry in Spectrum's cable packages-all 15 million subscribers today are paying $10+ month for it, while only 4 million watching it on a regular basis with another 3 million watching it occasionally . If ESPN became a stand alone like HBO how much would you be willing to pay? ESPN has to get at least $2 billion out of former Spectrum subscribers to break evan. Likely the 8 million who never watch would not be willing to pay even $1. So to make up for that revenue loss, would ESPN have to up charges to $15, would the occasional viewer be prepared to pay that 12 months a year? If not and most of them would only subscribed during college foootball Sept-Jan then would rates have to go to $20? How many would drop then?
Disney/ESPN would also have to increase fees to Hulu/Sling... too.

All we're doing is heading towards the streaming version of cable, just cutting out the middleman, but somehow still the same prices overall.

[Chip R]

It appears ESPN may no longer be a must carry in Spectrum's cable packages-all 15 million subscribers today are paying $10+ month for it, while only 4 million watching it on a regular basis with another 3 million watching it occasionally . If ESPN became a stand alone like HBO how much would you be willing to pay? ESPN has to get at least $2 billion out of former Spectrum subscribers to break evan. Likely the 8 million who never watch would not be willing to pay even $1. So to make up for that revenue loss, would ESPN have to up charges to $15, would the occasional viewer be prepared to pay that 12 months a year? If not and most of them would only subscribed during college foootball Sept-Jan then would rates have to go to $20? How many would drop then?
Disney/ESPN would also have to increase fees to Hulu/Sling... too.

I wonder if those Spectrum subscribers are going to see their bill reduced by $10+ a month now.

[jimbroznan]

I wonder if those Spectrum subscribers are going to see their bill reduced by $10+ a month now.

YES!!!
You can call in and get a $15 (one time credit), you may be on hold for 90 minutes+.

https://cordcuttersnews.com/spectrum-is-offering-15-credits-after-dropping-espn-other-disney-channels-here-is-how-to-get-it/

[Chip R]

YES!!!
You can call in and get a $15 (one time credit), you may be on hold for 90 minutes+.

https://cordcuttersnews.com/spectrum-is-offering-15-credits-after-dropping-espn-other-disney-channels-here-is-how-to-get-it/

One time. Awfully big of them to do that. :rolleyes:

[bucksfan2]

All we're doing is heading towards the streaming version of cable, just cutting out the middleman, but somehow still the same prices overall.

Its almost like we should have a bundle of all these streaming services all in one place. Its called cable!

[Bob Sheed]

Its almost like we should have a bundle of all these streaming services all in one place. Its called cable!

Not anymore. It's called the high seas, these days.

[Sea Ray]

ESPN is coming back to Spectrum. Their dispute is settled. I figured they'd get this settled pretty quick:

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/09/11/disney-charter-near-carriage-deal-that-would-end-cable-blackout-sources-say.html

[jimbroznan]

So +$2 to your cable bill and $2 off a Disney subscription. I assume ESPN will still be in almost all the bundles. Anyone know how the RSNs will be offered next year?

[goreds2]

YES!!!
You can call in and get a $15 (one time credit), you may be on hold for 90 minutes+.

https://cordcuttersnews.com/spectrum-is-offering-15-credits-after-dropping-espn-other-disney-channels-here-is-how-to-get-it/

Directv is in a dispute with NEXSTAR (NBC). I called Directv and got a one time $20 credit.

[Bob Sheed]

The high seas, they be choppy at times, mateys. Arrrrr that they do... But the choppiness ye find out in the open sea is nothing compared to the choppiness found in greedy media companies.

https://media.giphy.com/media/r499ZEqvZrL8JaKHP7/giphy.gif

Maybe one day, they be changin' their tunes. But I suspect their greed is as bottomless as the ocean herself...

[Kingspoint]

The high seas, they be choppy at times, mateys. Arrrrr that they do... But the choppiness ye find out in the open sea is nothing compared to the choppiness found in greedy media companies.

https://media.giphy.com/media/r499ZEqvZrL8JaKHP7/giphy.gif

Maybe one day, they be changin' their tunes. But I suspect their greed is as bottomless as the ocean herself...

They've lost every class-action suit against them, and it doesn't even slow them down. It's part of the cost of doing business (kind of like banks)

[Sea Ray]

A couple more firings:


ESPN fired two on-air personalities Thursday: football analyst Robert Griffin III and "Sunday NFL Countdown" host Sam Ponder. If the latter name sounds familiar to Florida State football fans, that's because the broadcaster is married to former FSU quarterback Christian Ponder.

According to The Athletic, Ponder and Griffin were let go as part of budget cuts. The two had limited roles at ESPN: RG3 was recently taken off "Monday Night Countdown" in favor of Jason Kelce, while Ponder's only role at the network was hosted the weekly NFL preview show.

https://www.tallahassee.com/story/sports/college/fsu/2024/08/16/espn-sam-ponder-fsu-football-christian-ponder-dave-portnoy/74826838007/

[Chip R]

A couple more firings:



https://www.tallahassee.com/story/sports/college/fsu/2024/08/16/espn-sam-ponder-fsu-football-christian-ponder-dave-portnoy/74826838007/

Conventional wisdom says it wasn't budget cuts. They still have to pay them and hire someone else to do what they did. RGIII made some posts that were critical of Paul Finebaum and company policy says thou shalt not criticize your fellow ESPN employee. I think Ponder chipped in on that boxer that was misgendered by many people.

[Sea Ray]

Conventional wisdom says it wasn't budget cuts. They still have to pay them and hire someone else to do what they did. RGIII made some posts that were critical of Paul Finebaum and company policy says thou shalt not criticize your fellow ESPN employee. I think Ponder chipped in on that boxer that was misgendered by many people.

I don't think it was budget cuts either. ESPN didn't keep Rush Limbaugh. There are political reasons that we can't go into here

[WVRed]

I don't think it was budget cuts either. ESPN didn't keep Rush Limbaugh. There are political reasons that we can't go into hereKirk Herbstreit is one id be curious to see if is the next "budget cut"

Sent from my SM-S911U using Tapatalk

[bucksfan2]

RGIII was a ticking time bomb. They guy wasn't afraid to say whatever came to his mind, very little filter. I don't think he was great and may have created a headache down the road.

I knew Ponder was pretty religious (didn't Portnoy go after her?) If she was vocal about the female boxer, that IMO was a mistake.

ESPN pretty much views almost everyone as replaceable. If they are doing budget cuts and you are someone who may cause a headache down the road, well.............

[WVRed]

RGIII was a ticking time bomb. They guy wasn't afraid to say whatever came to his mind, very little filter. I don't think he was great and may have created a headache down the road.

I knew Ponder was pretty religious (didn't Portnoy go after her?) If she was vocal about the female boxer, that IMO was a mistake.

ESPN pretty much views almost everyone as replaceable. If they are doing budget cuts and you are someone who may cause a headache down the road, well.............Yet Pat McAfee remains employed.

Sent from my SM-S911U using Tapatalk

[Boston Red]

Yet Pat McAfee remains employed.

Sent from my SM-S911U using Tapatalk

He's apparently popular (for whatever reason). Same reason Stephen A. is untouchable. (For now)

[bucksfan2]

Yet Pat McAfee remains employed.

Sent from my SM-S911U using Tapatalk

If you are going to be controversial (which I think RGIII was trending) you have to bring something to the table that others can't. McAfee is quite successful and brings a demographic that ESPN desperately needs.

[*BaseClogger*]

Kirk Herbstreit is one id be curious to see if is the next "budget cut"

Sent from my SM-S911U using Tapatalk

Why? Guy does it all. He's doing GameDay, a college game, and an NFL game every weekend.

[WVRed]

Why? Guy does it all. He's doing GameDay, a college game, and an NFL game every weekend.Same reason Ponder was let go. Not going to discuss it any further unless you want to in the P&R thread but a quick Google search will answer it.

Sent from my SM-S911U using Tapatalk

[Boston Red]

Same reason Ponder was let go. Not going to discuss it any further unless you want to in the P&R thread but a quick Google search will answer it.

Sent from my SM-S911U using Tapatalk

Being popular insulates you from those minor political dust-ups/philosophical differences. So Herbstreet would be well advised to stay relatively popular.

[Kingspoint]

Yet Pat McAfee remains employed.

Sent from my SM-S911U using Tapatalk

Ratings, Baby!

[RedTeamGo!]

Same reason Ponder was let go. Not going to discuss it any further unless you want to in the P&R thread but a quick Google search will answer it.

Sent from my SM-S911U using Tapatalk

Ponder was a nobody, Herbie is one of the faces of the network.

[kaldaniels]

Why? Guy does it all. He's doing GameDay, a college game, and an NFL game every weekend.

Yep. Herbie, Corso and Fowler are iconic.

I’ve seen some remarks he’s made and it’s nothing that’s going to get him canned. He says enough that you can read between the lines but nothing outlandish.

I’m pretty sure Ponder jumped into the fray a good bit - which is just foolish if you are employed by big media.

[*BaseClogger*]

Same reason Ponder was let go. Not going to discuss it any further unless you want to in the P&R thread but a quick Google search will answer it.

Sent from my SM-S911U using Tapatalk

Not only did Ponder go further as others are saying and Herby is more popular as others are saying but she was also much more replaceable since she hosted one studio show per week while Herbie calls two games in addition to his famous “studio” show. You’d have to replace him with potentially three different hires.